1. Field of the Invention
The present invention relates to laser pointers, and more particularly to an attachment for billiard cues that shows a player the point at which to strike the cue ball to make their intended shot.
2. Description of Prior Art
The various billiards games are all difficult by nature. It is easily understood why the game of billiards is the subject of more patents than any other sport with the exception of golf. There are many factors working against a pool player, most of which must be overcome by sheer talent and experience, although some devices have allowed players to improve their chances of overcoming these obstacles.
The two chief elements of a good pool shot are the trajectory upon which the cue ball is launched, and the position in which the cue ball stops. A cue ball projected in the wrong direction will not result in the object ball entering the target pocket. A cue ball not coming to rest in the position desired by the player may not allow a second successful shot, or, in worse cases, may result in a `scratch`, a most unfavorable condition. The final resting position, or `lie` of the cue ball is determined by the point upon said cue ball where it has been struck. Manipulating the cue ball so as to affect its final resting position is known as "applying english" to the ball.
There have been scores of patents that have enterprised to increase the likelihood of a player projecting the cue ball in the right direction. For instance, there is U.S. Pat. No. 5,338,262, where Hayes attempts to solve the problem by making a mark on the rail of a pool table to visually indicate a point toward which the cue ball should be launched. This invention assumes that the player will accurately strike the ball. If the cue ball is not struck in the proper position, the device by Hayes is worthless.
In U.S. Pat. No. 5,554,075, Glazer attempts to solve this by means of a laser, but his device requires fastening parts to the side of the player's cue which will result in imbalance, not to mention an increase in the weight of the cue stick. The proper balance and weight of a cue stick define its quality and utility. Furthermore, Glazer's device does not project a beam strictly parallel and collinear to the cue stick. This would result in misleading information from the laser image.
Wright, in U.S. Pat. No. 4,688,796, also proposes a laser sight to aid the player. However, the simple spot projected by the laser does not provide the player with any information on the angle in which to hold his stick. Simply hitting the cue ball in a particular spot does not ensure it will travel in the intended direction. To launch the cue accurately, there must be a correct combination of the strike position and strike angle. In an attempt to solve this, Wright suggests raising one or more ends of the stick to allow the beam to strike the cue ball first, and then the target ball. This requires changing the position of the stick, and ultimately coming to rest in a position that does not inform the player of the proper stick angle. Another problem of the Wright pool cue is the fact that the player must use a quite complex cue stick, designed and built around this patent. The avid pool player tends to become attached to their own favorite cue, and there would be no way to retrofit it with the Wright design. Furthermore, the complexity of the design are such that it would be impractical to ever build.
Carney, in U.S. Pat. No. 5,738,595, has also endeavored to solve the problem with a laser pointer, but his device suffers from the same problems as Glazer and Wright, particularly the balance and cue stick angle problems.
There have been numerous utility and design patents for laser pointers, including U.S. Pat. No. 5,268,820, Lo, and U.S. Pat. No. 5,697,700, Huang, but these designs do not have any references to potential applications as attachments to billiard cues, or as sights for billiard cues.